Ted Tenold

Greetings all, Since I grew up with horses, I've always been a fan of horse motifs on fittings and frankly they're the only type of fittings I actually collect for my own enjoyment. Generally, I find more enjoyment in those done in silhouette sukashi, kata kiribori, and works by say Yanagawa or Hamano styles, and also prefer those that are *just* the horses without riders, monkeys, trappings, etc.. About ten years ago I purchased this tsuba. I've yet to see another quite like it, and often wondered from what artist or school it may have originated. I've never found anything else like it in references or catalogs. The horses always struck me as perhaps influenced by sumi-e drawings. Submitting it to shinsa would be an obvious choice, and I may at some point, but it's honestly never been more than mild curiosity so I offer it here, and defer to those more wise in the ways of tsuba. The shape of the nakagoana is unusual, elluding to a higher shinogi style blade and within this it is very asymmetric as the shinogi points on either side are quite uneven. The punch marks are certainly utilitarian. This isn't a kantei with an answer at the end. Just sharing a piece I've always enjoyed. Anyone care to share any ideas or opinions on it? I have no delusions of grandeur about it, so feel free to speak casually.

Ah yes, a practioner of Berii Waito Do.

Excellent exercise Guido. Very informative, thank you. I thought about Mishina lineage for a fleeting moment, but still did not even consider Daido, and even if I had, the horimono would have cast serious doubts again. Is there any speculation on who may have carved the hori based on stylistic approach? As you pointed out, very unusual indeed!

Brian is spot on. Commissioning a Japanese smith to make a traditional sword for martial arts is quite common. Sometimes martial artists believe (especially those new to the arts) that it is either more proper to use an old sword (or just plain more romantic), or cheaper to obtain an antique for use rather than purchase a newly made one. Both are misconceptions. Newly made Japanese swords are just as traditional as antiques and are healthy enough for the rigors of daily use and training. Also, for the great majority of antique blades available, the koshirae (mountings) are also old and may not be safe for use, requiring a completely new koshirae be constructed. Wood, lacquer, rayskin, lace, all deteriorate with age. Properly made koshirae are expensive. Also, no sword lasts forever, and the frequent use that martial artists commit their swords to requires regular maintenance beyond just cleaning them. Some folks seem to think that once purchased, they never need any attention and last forever, but nothing is further from the truth. Handles need to be rewrapped, sayas will wear thin at the koiguchi and become dangerous (especially with beginners), handle cores will need inspection for proper fit to the tang, fittings will become loose and sloppy, mekugi will need replacement. There is no such thing as a maintenance free sword for training. The commitment to using a sword in training is a responsibility far greater than just finding something you like. As was mentioned before, your teacher holds the final word. Different styles of swordsmanship dictate different requirements, so it's also very likely that if you premeturely purchase a sword, it may be completely inadequate for that style.

No, Guido it's not your breath. Well.......it's your aftershave. Give up the "Hai Karate" my friend... :lol: Beautiful sword. You've only been in China for a few weeks and already found find this in one of those legendary storehouses, eh? I've been mulling this one over for a couple days actually. My first consideration was the habaki covers the lower part of the horimono so I was on the fence as to whether the hori were ubu or atobori, second guessing how judiciously those image modifications actually were done. So, I'm laying my trust and good faith in Guido's accurate photoshop skills, going with a Keicho Shinto sword that may have been slightly machiokuri. The boshi was also throwing me a loop and it also appeared that there might be some faint utsuri in there, but that may just be the migrain meds I've been taking for the past two days. Presence of mizukage would solidify my choice for otherwise. Anyways, I'm off the fence now, and going with my bid to: Monday was a holiday in the US. Maybe others are traveling or away from books also. I wouldn't be too critical on folks for not participating. It in no way discounts the efforts that Guido made to put this up and I'm sure it's appreciated. I do. Thanks Guido. Brian, as I like to tell my wife; "Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get me!". So, it's not age... maybe the "Old Spice" but not the age. Care to offer a bid on this one in between triathelons Stephen?

Rick, Congratulations on your sword! Let us know what the papers define when you receive them. Here's an image you might find helpful of a sword from the Chikuzen Nobukuni school by Nobukuni Mitsumasa from 1771 (chujosaku). Mitsumasa carved his own horimono, and you'll see some similarities between them. The jigane is also quite similar to yours with ohada and nagare. In this sword the hada starts like this down at the machis and then compresses to a finer pattern in the monouchi. The nioi guchi differs from yours in that it is not as tightly concentrated, but has a really deep nioi penetration into the ha with some tiny workings, so although similar work, it does shows little different approach. You will note the yasurime are consistent, but the nakagojiri is different also. Mitsumasa was also a tsuba maker and signed his works with the same name. Interestingly enough, he's noted as being part of the Namban group though. Perhaps Dr. Lissenden can shed some more light on this subject. I hope this helps you! Special thanks to Darcy Brockbank for the excellent photography.

Yes, the new images show it much better. The nakagojiri is correct for the Kaga school, and the shape looks good. It warrants further research. There's a kaga oshigata book that may have this smith in it, but I don't have a copy of it. I do stand corrected in that it does not look like a recent fake looking at the new pictures. From a purely aesthetic view, I still don't like the signature, but that doesn't mean it isn't original. :D

Mineral oil is the majority component of "choji oil", with only a tiny bit of actual clove oil added for fragrence. That said, mineral oil comes in a variety of consistencies, and what is typically available over the counter is grade that is very thick and will bead up on the sword making it a poor application. Using it frequently may cause build up in the saya which effectively becomes a grit magnet, and will also leach into the wood. Mineral oil in a very light grade can be obtained but by the time you go through the search, purchase, shipping, etc., you might as well just buy "sword oil" from any one of a number of reputable places. Maybe Moriyama-san, or someone else can elaborate, but "Neji" is "screw or twist" so perhaps this nejike stuff is some form of machine oil. Straight clove oil is available, but should *never* be used in pure form. It can actually promote corrosion.

Without intending to be cold-hearted....this signature is very clumsy, and the nakago contrived. This looks like yet another example of the many copies and forgeries seen in abundance these days. Hope it didn't cost much.

Paul, The Chu-Aoe I've seen (two in all, so not really a great cross-section of the school to go on), seemed "whiter" to me one had sumigane the other didn't. Not dull, or low quality looking, but more reflective(?), but not the depth of the Ko-Aoe jigane in color and warm luster. My guess is the styles of kitae create these visual differences. However the utsuri in the Chu-Aoe was quite striking. My post was one of thinking out loud for guessing the subject sword. Admittedly, I could have worded it better, but I had only a few moments to spare, and I don't feel like I've made it any better now to be honest. As for the Koza, I'm not really sure what "clearer" means? The blurred distinctions and varieties of styles definately make for a good subject to study. Let us know what you've seen too.

Definately Koto for me. Nagamaki span quite a timeline in Aoe works. From the image (Danger Will Robinson! Danger! Danger! ), the steel doesn't look like the quality of Ko-Aoe. The Chu-Aoe works I've seen lacked the luster of earlier Aoe, but did display some prominant utsuri, and Bizen looking characteristics I see some of in this piece, also fitting Chu-Aoe. The lack of sumigane is a mild concern, but not a total break from Aoe as it is not a totally dependant feature for Aoe either. The boshi also looks Aoe style, and since it's still there and not removed, the period doesn't extend much past Nambokucho for me where longer sweeping Naginata styles would have had the boshi removed with the sori alterations. I could go Ko-Aoe, but the steel and yakiba just don't drive me to earlier times. So, I'm guessing Nambokucho Yamashiro Chu-Aoe That's as far as I get right now.

Darcy has illistrated some really great points on a beautiful sword and I can't really add much more. The point I was really elluding to was the characteristic yakiba which is a great hallmark of the Sa style. The widening of the yakiba approaching the kissaki, to a narrowly pointed boshi and long kaeri. The shape is, as discussed, what can throw one off a bit and not unreasonably so. That narrow range between Late Kamakura and Nambokucho can get very fuzzy sometimes and furthering the difficulties of a direct bid to a smith with so few extant direct works, like Yukihiro. Entering the process by starting with period is the first opportunity to start that overthinking process and lead one down the wrong path. When the shape confuses from the outset, then a latent doubt is established about everything else following it making the process really frustrating. If one can't use the next catagory of den to regain their balance from stumbling over the exact period, then the problems just contine to magnify. Everyone falls flat on their face though. You just have to get up and dust yourself off. Several years ago this Yukihiro came up for sale and I was immediately attracted to it. Everything about it just appealed to me. I wasn't able to make the commitment at the time and passed the opportunity. Such is life. I have a habit of comparing swords to music. If a decent sword is like a note struck well on a finely tuned piano, then a good sword is like a simple yet pleasant chord, and great swords comparing to say, the kinds of chords Rachmaninov would play. Each sword has it's own timbre and any visual complexity that is overwhelming at first glance, begins to form its own balance that gradually presents itself with time, inviting the viewer to discover all the notes that comprise the piece. So I guess where I'm going with this is that looking at a fine sword in a picture (no matter how well executed) is much like listening to a great opus on a simple stereo; one can't get the full effect to appreciate, but the quality still shows through.

Milt, sorry I got caught up in the other points and lost track of your original question. As you describe it, I would say not. If the job looks like it was done righteously, then there's little reason to consider it detrimental, *other* than the loss of length to the sword which becomes a conditional consideration toward the loss in the body of the blade and less about an altered nakago. I saw a very nice Rai sword that had been shortened because it was placed in gunto mounts during the war and the blade had an area reaching far past the habaki that was still polished, but not had any yasurimei nor any patina installed. Understandably, it looked very odd but the intent was clear and the fact that the blade was an important sword provided some distraction from it's having been shortened. Should there have been yasuri and patina put on it? Maybe, depends on by who, and for what reason. Regardless, like Darcy demonstrated in another thread here, things should be looked at for not only what they are, but also demonstrate what they once were. The better the skills that apply this kind of alteration, the easier it is to envision former glory. Also, as in conventional kantei, the nakago wouldn't be seen anyway so the appraisal wouldn't include nakago considerations. Though, I assume you are talking about shinsa considerations and not kantei sessions. Each sword is of itself, and therefore each one should be considered for what it *should* display. There's speculation that some shinshinto smiths (or someone thereafter) patinated the nakagos of what then were brand new swords for any variety of reasons from imparting a start to the steels natural protection process, to "there's supposed to be color there". *Shrug* Who knows. I think it gets back to Compton's comments on variations being infinite, and generalizations full of exceptions. I've seen some that were in fine health and condition that looked like the nakagos were in a more advanced stage of patina development than I'd expect had the nagako been left alone. Yet others where the nakago has barely begun to patinate naturally, and yet rarer, one shinshinto ansei era that looked as new as a shinsakuto from last year's batch. But coming full circle, if the sword is nice, and the shortening well executed, and doesn't look as though it was installed with the intention of deception, that's a good place to be. Beyond that, there's a judgment call as to whether the piece should have the patina developed further to perhaps balance out and represent it more accurately, but this is a better question to a pro holding the piece in their hands. And, yes, Shinshinto smiths made lots and lots of copies both with respect to their traditional lineage such as Satsuma smiths making Shizu copies, but also in survival modes after the Hatorei when only the wealthy patronized the best smiths to make copies of famous swords. Gassan smiths made "utsushimono" of Masamune, Sadamune, etc..

On Yasurimei; Are they decorative or functional? Yes An extension of the school or personal? Yes Creation of form or refinement? Yes On Nugui; The belief that nugui imparts or "changes" the color of steel is a bit overplayed imho. The color of the steel is the color of the steel and changing the color of any particular sword to that of another is not that simple. Nugui can alter the hue, depth, visable activities, and sheen of a steel, but the process of development begins further back in the polishing process with choices of other stones like uchigomori and tsuyas. So it's nothing like changing Coke to Pepsi in one easy step. Indeed, too much nugui, or the wrong nugui can actually attenuate or "burn" the surface imparting an ugly brown color requiring a return back a couple of steps. Nugui is meant to accentuate and *develop* the color the steel demonstrates already. Can it make a difference? Sure, but in smaller degrees than would be reasonable or possible attempting to turn a shirake looking steel to the blue of another. Then again, nugui alone does not change the hada, boshi, yakiba, deki, keijo, and any number of other things more important to appraisals, and is dependant on the treatment of the surface long before it is applied. Therefore visable characteristics (or lack thereof) aren't totally negui dependant and appraising a sword based on color is somewhat ill-fated anyway. On Suriage; The care and dignity with which a suriage is performed is always a consideration. Just as a shortening a sword shouldn't be performed without skillful application, it should also not look contrived. Some of what make a really beautiful Koto piece is the care and skill that can be seen in how (or who) shortened it with precision. Koto pieces shortened in Keicho period come to mind as those admired for having been attractively done with care and consideration. No sword that has been judiciously and carefully shortened by skillful hands would be reasonably discounted. On the otherhand, one that has been lopped off at odd length, banged on, sanded, and rusted with heaven only knows what, will be a great distraction and disgrace. I guess my point is; it's all about the dignity once the deed is done.

I'll demonstrate a conspicuous silence on this one as I do have previous exposure to it from some years back. The comment Darcy makes about there being important kantei recognition point in it is a key element and requires no description. It is evident and recognizable in the body of the sword from the images, even if the nakago were not exposed. Lovely, lovely, piece.

Ah, yes. So this sword was altered for a short handle mounting. This handle is a Type 19 Army dress sword, and is part of a "D" guard style mounting. The Type 19 mountings were circa mid 1880's to early 1930's. This is similar to a police type but the two are differentiated by the cherry blossom. Each blossom on yours has 10 petals (five fully visable stacked on top of five behind). Police blossoms are only five. The "D" guard is apparently missing though because the handguard (tsuba) you have is more like a late WWII type. Perhaps it was an alteration by the wearer to alleviate the "d" assembly as it may have been unweildy or disallowed for use by superiors(?). This type of handle was phased out in the mid-1930's, but some continued to be used, so yours may have been modified. The backstrap is indeed a Type 19 though. So, my theory is that this sword already had the notches (munemachi and hamachi) moved up for whatever reason prior to the shortening of the tang which in turn was performed to accomodate fitting the Type 19 handle. This would explain why the carving (horimono) is below the collar (habaki), the habaki is a lesser seen design/type, and the tang (nakago) is so short. Hope this helps.

Good points. About 8 years ago I examined a Magoroku Kanemoto Tanto. The nakago was ubu length and nijimei with three ana, two of which had been filled with lead. It was very very polished down but his classic soft sanbonsugi (gyoshotai styled) still remained with bo-utsuri. Papered to Tokubetsu Hozon......even though it had *no* boshi. The yakiba ran off the ha near the kissaki. Close examination revealed that the old and yet nice saya had been repaired to accomodate the tanto, so it had been with the blade since before the tip was broken off and the blade reshaped. So the owner thought a great deal of the sword in that it didn't get discarded for what is commonly seen as a "fatal" flaw. Instead, it was repaired with care and consideration. The NBTHK papered it based on the merits of a sword by a highly regarded smith, verifiable by both the work that remained and a mei which were unquestionably his, earning it the judgement of "special preservation". It was also conveyed to me that Magoroku tanto were somewhat a blade of choice for seppuku. Arguably, one might disregard this as a myth, but then there are wood block prints of samurai committing seppuku with a blade noted to be a Magoroku blade, and they are after all, at the top of the scale for sharpness ratings. . In 1970, writer Yukio Mishima committed suicide purportedly with a Magoroku blade (though apparently never recovered(?)). So the long esteem of Magoroku works is quite evident and this merit builds a high regard for any original examples, thus making condition issues secondary considerations. The aforementioned Toku-Ho tanto was purchased on ebay and had been committed to a bench grinder. Nothing was visable in it. Fortunately, the nakago had been left alone and remained in excellent condition. A happy ending to an otherwise dismal result of a bone-headed act. Just more food for thoughts.

Sorry about that Fritz, we get kinda comfortable with the terms and forget that they're not everyday terms to everybody. Maybe the mountings will point to more answers.

Thanks, Me too! My last location would have been listed as the "Peoples Republic of California". Glad that's over... :lol:

The nakago is a bit stubby even for having been shortened. These shorter blades with stubby nakagos are seen coming out of Kyu-Guntos, and other "D" guard styles of the late 19th and early 20th century designs. I almost wonder if the shortening didn't come sometime *after* a machi okuri which may have perhaps aleviated earlier damage , i.e. broken hamachi, running kizu, etc. It's also interesting to note that the habaki has no notch in it (called a "kimekomi" if my memory serves correct) but rather the leading edges butt up directly to the ha and mune machis without the inset of common design. This type of habaki sets it further back into the nakago, which may also have been a design choice for a short handled military koshirae of some kind, thus also preserving more of the nakago and mei. Notice the nakago ends right at the last character of "saku" (or: (wo) tsukuru). I don't see these features as coincidental. It would've been too easy to just lop it off where ever necessary as seen frequently on other blades. Is there any koshirae with this sword? The horimono will make this blade a more expensive polish than a comparable blade without horimono. Very very time consuming and intricate work, thus pricier. Yet another reason to have the sword examined prior to deciding whether to polish it or not.

I personally wouldn't worry about it being gimei. I've never seen or heard of a gimei Bungo Takada sword, unless it was one signed "Hizen Koku ju xxx Tada xxx". :lol: The Takada school was capable of qualitative swords, but their vast norm was a more utilitarian weapon. It makes sense that it was in higher grade gunto mounts as Bungo swords are regarded as being good cutters, and Fujishiro notes this with the "wazamono" rating. Submitting it to shinsa will really only confirm what is already pretty much evident; sig is likely good (I'm no shinsa judge but imho it looks righteous), quality for this group/smith is slightly above average (at least from the images shown). However Fujishiro notes that this was the founder working in Keicho. Some of the activity you described might bump it up from other utilitarian works as well. As an early work of the school I'd offer that it might be worth the submission to document and affirm this. It really all comes down to your priorities and intentions, and might also depend on how many other blades you were considering submitting. If your slots are limited and you are forced to make choices, I'd consider using the positions for blades with more obvious qualitative aspects, and/or those with more merit potential. If you've got more slots than swords, then it's just a personal matter of whether you want an affirmation and rating. Admittedly a verbose, yet wishy-washy answer on my part, but in summation I'd consider submitting it on any qualitative aspects of the work first without worrying about the mei.

Peter, I'd say Bungo would be a pretty good bet on this one. The Bungo smiths habitually signed with "Fujiwara" first, and many had "yuki" as the second kanji in their name. Though I haven't looked further myself, there were a ton of smiths in the school and you may not find anything on this one specifically. Aside from that, the visable work resembles Bungo style to me. I'd expect a little more activity and perhaps a bit more width in the habuchi for Echizen work. My two cents....

No, I don't believe he's describing utsuri, or he'd just describe it as such. It reads as though he's describing "nijuba", but not like you'd expect from say Shikkake school where the multiple "hamons" rise out of the habuchi in the same deki, but rather a soft line of nioi in the yakiba *below* the niedeki of the habuchi. Perhaps more like an elongated "yo" floating inside the yakiba. Simply calling it "nijuba", might lead the viewer astray due to the conventional definition it has with other smiths or schools. His description seems intentionally precise by pointing out the different deki and locations.

Yes, there are indeed some condition issues. The tip has been reduced and pulled back, thus disrupting the continuation of yakiba width from monouchi to boshi we would expect to see. In addition, it disrupts the region of the koshinogi we would normally see the slope of the kaeri cross over reaching to the mune. Here, it is very short of where it should be. The shingane is showing through in places, however there are also areas of what appear to be sumigane which would be consistant with Hizen smiths. Given all the features I'd say...

Seems to me there's a look of Etchu"ness" with this sword. I keep coming back to that, but would like to see more characteristic qualities of Norishige to call it that. I'd say how about Kaga Sanekage?